Teach For America (TFA) is a non-profit, AmeriCorps program that was founded by Wendy Kopp in 1989. Kopp wrote her undergraduate thesis on the idea of Teach For America and decided to give it a whirl in the American Education system without herself having any experience being a classroom teacher. Teach For America started out as an organization that placed elite, accelerated college graduates in urban districts across the country for a two-year commitment. TFA’s mission was to fill the teaching positions in inner-city schools that highly qualified teachers with degrees did not want. TFA’s goal was to change education for the better and their promise was that that starts with having better teachers.
Today, Teach For America fills urban classrooms across the United States with over 11,000 of its corps members who promise the mission of, “One day, all children in this nation will have the opportunity to attain an excellent education.” Thirty-two thousand corps members have come out of the program, some are still in the classrooms, some have decided that two years was enough and some have started charter schools across the country and have risen to the top of the 'new educational reformists.'
With all of the controversy regarding for Teach For America, it’s difficult to make a claim about whether the program is intended to be mindful of the one thing that really does matter in education; the children. Instead, this paper will investigate an umbrella question, what is Teach For America actually doing for American Public Education?
To investigate the question of, what effect does Teach For America have on American Public Education? The researcher collected articles and opinion pieces of well-known senior scholars, including Diana Ravitch and Gary Rubinstein to display both the cons and pros. This paper is organized into four sections; annotated bibliography of relevant sources on what TFA is doing in public education, its effects in Rhode Island, and a summary of the results.
Annotated Bibliography
Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Summary
In Diane Ravitch’s Reign of Error, Chapter 14, The Problem with Teach For America, Ravitch talks about the finances of TFA, the teacher turn-over rate and the reality of which is that research has shown that Teach For America members’ students are obtaining about the same test scores that a classroom of a first year teacher’s students are obtaining. Therefore, why is it that TFA is making claims about being saviors in the public schools?
First, Ravitch opens up the chapter with a claim that the reality of TFA is that it places, young, intelligent college graduates into difficult, urban schools, where they get about the same results as other bright young people in similar classrooms, but leave the classroom sooner. Leaving the profession sooner causes a huge turn-over rate and teacher retention, teaching is said to not be very constant within urban schools and TFA is widening that realization. Ravitch views TFA as a place for bright, young scholars to put their time in and make a mark on their resume and then continue on with their professional path after two-year period is served. (Ravitch, 2013 p. 135) Ravitch believes that when TFA started, it was an organization that had a high societal standing and could have potentially made a difference, but now the organization feels that it’s the savior to public education when in reality, it’s hurting it financially and downplaying teaching.
Ravitch views TFA as an organization that is slowly taking over public education by receiving grants and gifts. Many legislators believe that this organization is changing the way our schools work in a positive note and donate money continuously. TFA is a corporate organization gaining over $907 million in foundation grants, corporation gifts and government funding. Each school that has a contract with TFA pays TFA $2,000 for every member working for them. (Ravitch, 2013, p. 137)
In conclusion, Ravitch states that Teach For America is at the center of the corporate reform movement. People such as Michelle Rhee have come out of two years of working in a classroom with only TFA training and then was appointed the superintendent of Washington D.C.’s public schools. Ravitch states that the people who have the power and resources to change the nature of the teaching profession (the U.S. Department of Education and other huge foundations) are mistakenly pouring money and resources into TFA instead of devoting attention into improving teaching. Ravitch’s main argument throughout the chapter is that our country needs to strengthen the teaching profession and organizations like Teach For America depreciate and undermine what the teaching profession is and stands for. She feels that our country wouldn’t run a five- week training program for doctors and then place doctors in clinics across the country. Why do we entrust our students to be taught by young individuals who have only gained five weeks of teaching experience to be placed in the schools that need the most help?
Reaction
My reaction to this overall chapter is that I entirely agree with everything Ravitch is saying, but I do not think that TFA is taking over public education. I think that it is definitely not improving it, but TFA isn't at a place where it is taking over the schools.
After doing a ton of research on Teach For America, I've found that if the program is reevaluated and changed around a bit to fit a professional suit, then it might not be a terrible thing. I just worry that this probably will not happen do to large amounts of money and reputation now involved.
Summary
This article posted in the Harvard Magazine combines the pros and cons of Teach For America. This article interviews various TFA alumni. Some who came out of TFA loving the experience the whole time and others who said that while they were in training they were told that the teaches were the problem and that they are going to go in and fix those schools, but a quote from a TFA alumni sums up her feelings. She says that you are told to go into the schools and change them and fix the teachers, but she said she found herself turning towards those veteran teachers that were supposedly the problem all the time because she had no idea what she was doing.
On the other hand, TFA alumni quoted in the article saying that they would have never have thought to go into teaching, but with a program like this, it’s helped them pave a way into becoming an educator. An TFA alumni states that TFA was never meant to save teaching, but it is a movement toward the solution. This alumni also says that TFA has gotten tons of people talking about education even if it’s just for two years. This TFA alumni member is now the founding dean of school culture at Achievement First Aspire Elementary, a charter school in Brooklyn’s East New York neighborhood.
This article jumps back and forth between people agreeing with the TFA model and people disagreeing with the TFA model. One thing reigns true through this entire article. Each side clearly says that TFA isn’t the cure for public education.
Reaction
To me, this is an opinion piece, but it's an opinion piece based on the interviewee's thoughts and experiences with TFA. I wanted to include this in my research because I will not have enough time to actually speak with a large population of TFA corps members and I wanted to have their voices heard as well. With the continuos controversy over TFA, it is only fair to allow the actual members speak on behalf of their experiences. You will see though that the majority of the individuals who were involved in TFA found it to be an organization that promised a lot, but didn't deliver.
Summary
Julian Heilig & Su Jin Jez wrote a peer-review (blindly by the National Education Policy Center) piece on how TFA should improve.
Heilig & Jez (2013) write that TFA should improve their current stance in the reform movement. This article introduces key concepts and suggestions, such as TFA shouldn’t be a priority when hiring teachers, it should be something to consider when the candidate pool is of teachers with less qualifications that TFA members. Also, TFA should change their criteria to a five-year commitment and not just a two year commitment to reduce turnover rates. And, it acknowledges to require TFA members to receive additional teacher training throughout their commitment. These recommendations are not saying to do away with TFA, but rather while TFA is still in existence, there needs to be significant improvement. Heilig & Jez do not think TFA is such a problem as everyone is making it out to be, but they feel that it does need improvement.
This article summarizes that TFA members only make up 0.002% of the United State’s 3.5 million teachers, and that despite the hundreds of millions of dollars in funding and extensive lobbying by supporters and prominent alumni (Rhee), TFA should not be considered a major factor for improving teacher quality in hard-to-staff schools.
Heilig & Jez proclaim that TFA spends nearly $600,000 per year for “direct contact with legislators, their staffs, government officials and legislative bodies” in order to obtain millions of dollars in public money and lobby for educational policy. (Heilig & Jez 2013, p. 9)
Moreover, TFA supporters see non-TFA teachers as a major contributor to the failures of the schools today. TFA members see that they are the key to improving education, despite their short term and statistically limited effectiveness.
“TFA proponents see TFA as providing urban and rural schools with “outstanding recent college graduates” who will “go above and beyond traditional expectations” to improve students’ academic achievement. TFA opponents claim that the corps is not a solution, but an expensive, short-term classroom tourism that exacerbates the revolving door of teachers in hard to staff school. Who is right?” (Heilig & Jez 2013, p. 13)
Reaction
My opinion regarding saving public education in this country and bringing our democratic roots back to education does not involve this type of business model that TFA is currently displaying. I feel that TFA is a money driving mechanism to split education apart. Their mission of saving the poor will turn into a selfish, money thirsty corporate business plan more so than it already potentially is. As Ravitch stated, TFA is at the center of the reform movement.
Summary
Gary Rubenstein is a very prominent and vocal opposer of TFA. He was once a member of the organization, but has done quite a bit of research, blogging, publishing books and working against the ‘educational reforms' because he has first handling seen TFA destroy the public education of this country.
Rubenstein’s blog is listed here to show his opinions and ideas of what will happen to education in American if we keep following the TFA model and the privatization movement. He states in numerous posts that he still attends TFA alumni presentations and he is sadden to see what the organization has become. He says that they treat themselves like the are the saviors of public education and that they are the ones that know how to run a classroom. Heck, he says that some in their second year of working in a classroom feel they could run a charter and very well do so.
Rubenstein has challenged Kopp and her beliefs about her TFA creation publicly and he concludes that it’s just a simple money driven organization for her.
Each year (or for the past two) Rubenstein writes a blog post to the new TFA members who will be entering classrooms and he tells them to read his literature and read other literature about TFA. His goal is to get people who were like himself to see that TFA isn’t the answer to improving public education.
In Rubenstein’s latest blog post he talks about going to New Orleans and attending a TFA conference. He calls New Orleans the “epicenter of the education reform” because that’s where charter schools are opening and closing year after year, and being run by TFA alumni year after year. Rubenstein said that during his visit he was so surprised to see the lack of knowledge about education from the TFA current members.
Reaction
Though Rubenstein is clearly against TFA, his blog and articles and publications offer very realistic data of the reason he is brutally honest with new corps members. I feel that it's important to acknowledge someone who has been involved with TFA and who has shown his care for public schools. My only concern is that Rubenstein works in a very elite high school that only accepts certain types of students. I worry that he isn't necessarily living the part.
Summary
This New York Times article evokes numerous personal stories about Teach For America. One story is about a girl who had a Teach For America teacher change her life and that she decided to join the organization, regardless of the criticism it received, because she wanted to reach out to students just like this TFA corps member did towards her. She thought that TFA was a success story and she wanted to be a part of an organization that helped her in life so she could help students who come from the same background. Teach For America was her reason for wanting to make a difference in the lives of children.
Reaction
I really wanted to include this article because it is from the New York Times, and though they can be biased, I find them to be a very reputable source. Again, this article describes what TFA is doing in the schools from students perspectives, teachers perspectives and corps members perspectives. Even though I have raw data from my scholarly research, I find opinion pieces to be just as important when dealing with a controversial topic as TFA.
Affecting Schools in Rhode Island
According to data collected from Heilig & Jez (2013), Rhode Island currently has 51 TFA members in its schools. Is this because schools couldn’t fill those positions, or is this because TFA has a prominent voice amongst education reformers and urban settings?
Fifty-one teaching jobs in the whole state of Rhode Island does not seem like very much. When one looks at how many schools are in each town, one can begin to realize that fifty-one teaching positions can fill at least one school. This data doesn’t include The New Teacher Project (TNTP) members, another teaching certifcation program based off of Michelle Rhee, that are in Rhode Island as well. I do not believe that TFA has that strong of an impact in Rhode Island as it does in other states such as Washington, D.C. and Louisiana. The one thing that strongly effects those fifty-one positions that are held by TFA is that each school that has a TFA corps member, pays TFA $2,000.
For those 51 positions, our state lost $102,000 in its schools’ budget. That money is now in the hands of TFA. (If TFA had contracts with these schools).* More research would need to be done to conclude this.
Conclusion
With the results found and included in this paper on Teach For America and its effects on public education in America, the literature and data indicate that TFA is effecting our public schools by financial status, teacher retention and overall the reputation of the way the program interacts with veteran teachers and its shift of driving education towards privatization. Though some of the personal stories researched depict that Teach For America had been a positive impact, it only reigns true for those individuals and not necessarily the whole picture of how TFA is effecting public schools. This research isn't to say that corps members do not want to make a difference in children's lives, but it does indicate what the program is offering and verbalizing to teachers and the country.
Ravitch claims that Teach For America takes away money from the schools, downplays teachers, and more importantly it’s turning alumni corps members into thinking they know how to run the education of this country. Is this the type of organization that we can entrust to lead our children towards success, or is it just a corporation turning education into a business model?
Introduction
Teach For America (TFA) is a non-profit, AmeriCorps program that was founded by Wendy Kopp in 1989. Kopp wrote her undergraduate thesis on the idea of Teach For America and decided to give it a whirl in the American Education system without herself having any experience being a classroom teacher. Teach For America started out as an organization that placed elite, accelerated college graduates in urban districts across the country for a two-year commitment. TFA’s mission was to fill the teaching positions in inner-city schools that highly qualified teachers with degrees did not want. TFA’s goal was to change education for the better and their promise was that that starts with having better teachers.
Today, Teach For America fills urban classrooms across the United States with over 11,000 of its corps members who promise the mission of, “One day, all children in this nation will have the opportunity to attain an excellent education.” Thirty-two thousand corps members have come out of the program, some are still in the classrooms, some have decided that two years was enough and some have started charter schools across the country and have risen to the top of the 'new educational reformists.'
With all of the controversy regarding for Teach For America, it’s difficult to make a claim about whether the program is intended to be mindful of the one thing that really does matter in education; the children. Instead, this paper will investigate an umbrella question, what is Teach For America actually doing for American Public Education?
To investigate the question of, what effect does Teach For America have on American Public Education? The researcher collected articles and opinion pieces of well-known senior scholars, including Diana Ravitch and Gary Rubinstein to display both the cons and pros. This paper is organized into four sections; annotated bibliography of relevant sources on what TFA is doing in public education, its effects in Rhode Island, and a summary of the results.
Annotated Bibliography
Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Summary
In Diane Ravitch’s Reign of Error, Chapter 14, The Problem with Teach For America, Ravitch talks about the finances of TFA, the teacher turn-over rate and the reality of which is that research has shown that Teach For America members’ students are obtaining about the same test scores that a classroom of a first year teacher’s students are obtaining. Therefore, why is it that TFA is making claims about being saviors in the public schools?
First, Ravitch opens up the chapter with a claim that the reality of TFA is that it places, young, intelligent college graduates into difficult, urban schools, where they get about the same results as other bright young people in similar classrooms, but leave the classroom sooner. Leaving the profession sooner causes a huge turn-over rate and teacher retention, teaching is said to not be very constant within urban schools and TFA is widening that realization. Ravitch views TFA as a place for bright, young scholars to put their time in and make a mark on their resume and then continue on with their professional path after two-year period is served. (Ravitch, 2013 p. 135) Ravitch believes that when TFA started, it was an organization that had a high societal standing and could have potentially made a difference, but now the organization feels that it’s the savior to public education when in reality, it’s hurting it financially and downplaying teaching.
Ravitch views TFA as an organization that is slowly taking over public education by receiving grants and gifts. Many legislators believe that this organization is changing the way our schools work in a positive note and donate money continuously. TFA is a corporate organization gaining over $907 million in foundation grants, corporation gifts and government funding. Each school that has a contract with TFA pays TFA $2,000 for every member working for them. (Ravitch, 2013, p. 137)
In conclusion, Ravitch states that Teach For America is at the center of the corporate reform movement. People such as Michelle Rhee have come out of two years of working in a classroom with only TFA training and then was appointed the superintendent of Washington D.C.’s public schools. Ravitch states that the people who have the power and resources to change the nature of the teaching profession (the U.S. Department of Education and other huge foundations) are mistakenly pouring money and resources into TFA instead of devoting attention into improving teaching. Ravitch’s main argument throughout the chapter is that our country needs to strengthen the teaching profession and organizations like Teach For America depreciate and undermine what the teaching profession is and stands for. She feels that our country wouldn’t run a five- week training program for doctors and then place doctors in clinics across the country. Why do we entrust our students to be taught by young individuals who have only gained five weeks of teaching experience to be placed in the schools that need the most help?
Reaction
My reaction to this overall chapter is that I entirely agree with everything Ravitch is saying, but I do not think that TFA is taking over public education. I think that it is definitely not improving it, but TFA isn't at a place where it is taking over the schools.
After doing a ton of research on Teach For America, I've found that if the program is reevaluated and changed around a bit to fit a professional suit, then it might not be a terrible thing. I just worry that this probably will not happen do to large amounts of money and reputation now involved.
Harvard alumni reflect on their Teach for America experiences | Harvard Magazine. (n.d.). Retrieved July 18, 2014, from http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/12/is-teach-for-america-good-for-america
Summary
This article posted in the Harvard Magazine combines the pros and cons of Teach For America. This article interviews various TFA alumni. Some who came out of TFA loving the experience the whole time and others who said that while they were in training they were told that the teaches were the problem and that they are going to go in and fix those schools, but a quote from a TFA alumni sums up her feelings. She says that you are told to go into the schools and change them and fix the teachers, but she said she found herself turning towards those veteran teachers that were supposedly the problem all the time because she had no idea what she was doing.
On the other hand, TFA alumni quoted in the article saying that they would have never have thought to go into teaching, but with a program like this, it’s helped them pave a way into becoming an educator. An TFA alumni states that TFA was never meant to save teaching, but it is a movement toward the solution. This alumni also says that TFA has gotten tons of people talking about education even if it’s just for two years. This TFA alumni member is now the founding dean of school culture at Achievement First Aspire Elementary, a charter school in Brooklyn’s East New York neighborhood.
This article jumps back and forth between people agreeing with the TFA model and people disagreeing with the TFA model. One thing reigns true through this entire article. Each side clearly says that TFA isn’t the cure for public education.
Reaction
To me, this is an opinion piece, but it's an opinion piece based on the interviewee's thoughts and experiences with TFA. I wanted to include this in my research because I will not have enough time to actually speak with a large population of TFA corps members and I wanted to have their voices heard as well. With the continuos controversy over TFA, it is only fair to allow the actual members speak on behalf of their experiences. You will see though that the majority of the individuals who were involved in TFA found it to be an organization that promised a lot, but didn't deliver.
Heilig J. & Jez S. (2013) Teach for America: A Return to the Evidence. (n.d.). National Education Policy Center. Retrieved July 18, 2014, from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/teach-for-america-return
Summary
Julian Heilig & Su Jin Jez wrote a peer-review (blindly by the National Education Policy Center) piece on how TFA should improve.
Heilig & Jez (2013) write that TFA should improve their current stance in the reform movement. This article introduces key concepts and suggestions, such as TFA shouldn’t be a priority when hiring teachers, it should be something to consider when the candidate pool is of teachers with less qualifications that TFA members. Also, TFA should change their criteria to a five-year commitment and not just a two year commitment to reduce turnover rates. And, it acknowledges to require TFA members to receive additional teacher training throughout their commitment. These recommendations are not saying to do away with TFA, but rather while TFA is still in existence, there needs to be significant improvement. Heilig & Jez do not think TFA is such a problem as everyone is making it out to be, but they feel that it does need improvement.
This article summarizes that TFA members only make up 0.002% of the United State’s 3.5 million teachers, and that despite the hundreds of millions of dollars in funding and extensive lobbying by supporters and prominent alumni (Rhee), TFA should not be considered a major factor for improving teacher quality in hard-to-staff schools.
Heilig & Jez proclaim that TFA spends nearly $600,000 per year for “direct contact with legislators, their staffs, government officials and legislative bodies” in order to obtain millions of dollars in public money and lobby for educational policy. (Heilig & Jez 2013, p. 9)
Moreover, TFA supporters see non-TFA teachers as a major contributor to the failures of the schools today. TFA members see that they are the key to improving education, despite their short term and statistically limited effectiveness.
“TFA proponents see TFA as providing urban and rural schools with “outstanding recent college graduates” who will “go above and beyond traditional expectations” to improve students’ academic achievement. TFA opponents claim that the corps is not a solution, but an expensive, short-term classroom tourism that exacerbates the revolving door of teachers in hard to staff school. Who is right?” (Heilig & Jez 2013, p. 13)
Reaction
My opinion regarding saving public education in this country and bringing our democratic roots back to education does not involve this type of business model that TFA is currently displaying. I feel that TFA is a money driving mechanism to split education apart. Their mission of saving the poor will turn into a selfish, money thirsty corporate business plan more so than it already potentially is. As Ravitch stated, TFA is at the center of the reform movement.
Site Search | Teach For America teacher blogs are on Teach For Us. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://teachforus.org/site-search
Summary
Gary Rubenstein is a very prominent and vocal opposer of TFA. He was once a member of the organization, but has done quite a bit of research, blogging, publishing books and working against the ‘educational reforms' because he has first handling seen TFA destroy the public education of this country.
Rubenstein’s blog is listed here to show his opinions and ideas of what will happen to education in American if we keep following the TFA model and the privatization movement. He states in numerous posts that he still attends TFA alumni presentations and he is sadden to see what the organization has become. He says that they treat themselves like the are the saviors of public education and that they are the ones that know how to run a classroom. Heck, he says that some in their second year of working in a classroom feel they could run a charter and very well do so.
Rubenstein has challenged Kopp and her beliefs about her TFA creation publicly and he concludes that it’s just a simple money driven organization for her.
Each year (or for the past two) Rubenstein writes a blog post to the new TFA members who will be entering classrooms and he tells them to read his literature and read other literature about TFA. His goal is to get people who were like himself to see that TFA isn’t the answer to improving public education.
In Rubenstein’s latest blog post he talks about going to New Orleans and attending a TFA conference. He calls New Orleans the “epicenter of the education reform” because that’s where charter schools are opening and closing year after year, and being run by TFA alumni year after year. Rubenstein said that during his visit he was so surprised to see the lack of knowledge about education from the TFA current members.
Reaction
Though Rubenstein is clearly against TFA, his blog and articles and publications offer very realistic data of the reason he is brutally honest with new corps members. I feel that it's important to acknowledge someone who has been involved with TFA and who has shown his care for public schools. My only concern is that Rubenstein works in a very elite high school that only accepts certain types of students. I worry that he isn't necessarily living the part.
Is Teach for America Working? (n.d.). The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/08/30/is-teach-for-america-working/teach-for-america-is-a-glorified-temp-agency
Summary
This New York Times article evokes numerous personal stories about Teach For America. One story is about a girl who had a Teach For America teacher change her life and that she decided to join the organization, regardless of the criticism it received, because she wanted to reach out to students just like this TFA corps member did towards her. She thought that TFA was a success story and she wanted to be a part of an organization that helped her in life so she could help students who come from the same background. Teach For America was her reason for wanting to make a difference in the lives of children.
Reaction
I really wanted to include this article because it is from the New York Times, and though they can be biased, I find them to be a very reputable source. Again, this article describes what TFA is doing in the schools from students perspectives, teachers perspectives and corps members perspectives. Even though I have raw data from my scholarly research, I find opinion pieces to be just as important when dealing with a controversial topic as TFA.
Affecting Schools in Rhode Island
According to data collected from Heilig & Jez (2013), Rhode Island currently has 51 TFA members in its schools. Is this because schools couldn’t fill those positions, or is this because TFA has a prominent voice amongst education reformers and urban settings?
Fifty-one teaching jobs in the whole state of Rhode Island does not seem like very much. When one looks at how many schools are in each town, one can begin to realize that fifty-one teaching positions can fill at least one school. This data doesn’t include The New Teacher Project (TNTP) members, another teaching certifcation program based off of Michelle Rhee, that are in Rhode Island as well. I do not believe that TFA has that strong of an impact in Rhode Island as it does in other states such as Washington, D.C. and Louisiana. The one thing that strongly effects those fifty-one positions that are held by TFA is that each school that has a TFA corps member, pays TFA $2,000.
For those 51 positions, our state lost $102,000 in its schools’ budget. That money is now in the hands of TFA. (If TFA had contracts with these schools).* More research would need to be done to conclude this.
Conclusion
With the results found and included in this paper on Teach For America and its effects on public education in America, the literature and data indicate that TFA is effecting our public schools by financial status, teacher retention and overall the reputation of the way the program interacts with veteran teachers and its shift of driving education towards privatization. Though some of the personal stories researched depict that Teach For America had been a positive impact, it only reigns true for those individuals and not necessarily the whole picture of how TFA is effecting public schools. This research isn't to say that corps members do not want to make a difference in children's lives, but it does indicate what the program is offering and verbalizing to teachers and the country.
Ravitch claims that Teach For America takes away money from the schools, downplays teachers, and more importantly it’s turning alumni corps members into thinking they know how to run the education of this country. Is this the type of organization that we can entrust to lead our children towards success, or is it just a corporation turning education into a business model?
Additional Research
http://www.npr.org/2012/06/11/154761299/is-teach-for-america-failing
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/02/01/a-letter-to-teach-for-americas-wendy-kopp-and-her-response/
http://www.teachforamerica.org/